W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Hanging the APIs off navigator.device

From: Doug Turner <w3c@dougt.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 07:38:29 -0800
Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
Message-Id: <992B723C-861A-40FA-987F-90455FAF6404@dougt.org>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>

On Jan 7, 2010, at 7:01 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On Jan 6, 2010, at 17:29 , Robin Berjon wrote:
>> I think we should eliminate option (3) because it doesn't scale (if we produce a Unicorn spec, since unicorns graze too we'll have painted us into a corner).
>> 
>> The more I think about (2) the less I like it. It makes for a huge device object that doesn't really make much sense as a whole.
>> 
>> So I guess the question is how much we mind polluting navigator :) Personally, I don't mind much because it's not a space in which authors normally put stuff so the risks should be low. The downside is that we don't own navigator (the HTML WG does) but I guess we can ask for their review.
>> 
>> So I'm going to go with (4), i.e. Doug's proposal which Max already indicated support for.
>> 
>> Any other opinions?
> 
> You'll note that before expressing a relative preference, I wrote a few paragraphs explaining why. This isn't a vote people, your support for an option ought to be motivated (at the very least with "I support N because I agree with X")!
> 
> --
> Robin Berjon
>  robineko  hired gun, higher standards
>  http://robineko.com/


I support (4) because I agree with DougT. so +1  ;-)

DougT
Received on Thursday, 7 January 2010 15:39:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:41 UTC